Bob La Trémouille edits and reports.
1. "They were expendable."
2. Comment from the Editor.
1. "They were expendable."
From Archie Mazmanian:
This may serve as the headline of an obituary shortly as the current annihilation takes place. Assuming the MWRA introduced a gaggle of White Geese in the 1980s in the area of the BU Bridge - although there may have been an pre-existing gaggle - was the gig for that gaggle to improve water quality or to serve some other environmental purpose? Perhaps the services of the White Geese are no longer required. If such is the case, why not relocate the gaggle? The White Geese are not overrunning the area of the BU Bridge.
Today's Sunday NYTimes (9/6/09) includes a feature in its first section titled "Tick-Borne Illnesses Have Nantucket Considering Some Deer-Based Solutions" by Pam Belluch about that island's Lyme and other disease problems related to deer ticks. Deer were introduced to Nantucket and proliferated. A Boston Globe story on Block Island several years ago disclosed a similar situation there. A proposed solution was to reduce - not annihilate - the deer herd. Animal rights protestors have objected.
I mention this article to contrast the situation with the White Geese, who to my knowledge are not creating health problems for the adjoining community and have not innundated the area. In fact, the White Geese are being squeezed. The "people" behind this do not propose to slaughter the White Geese with abatoir techniques because of the anticipated response to such barbarism. Starving the beast provides these "people" with a clearer conscience. Besides, relocating them can be costly as well as difficult. These "people" are relying upon the fact that the gaggle is not that large. Few know of the plight of the White Geese as they have been squeezed out of the public's vision, as it is difficult for the gaggle to enjoy the waters of the Charles River. Out of sight, out of mind. There is a name for this when a minority of humans are involved.
The deer continue on Nantucket and Block Island, increasing in numbers, despite extended hunting seasons. The White Geese cause us no harm. Isn't there something wrong with this?
2. Comment from the Editor.
When I originally posted Archie's comments, I took the move comment in the vein I really think he meant it. On rethinking, some elaboration is needed.
Clearly the explanation of the Cambridge Pols for the outrage of heartless animal abuse EXACTLY fits Archie's analysis. To the extent these supposed humans deign to mention their behavior, the explanation translates as "These are the little guys. How dare you object to us destroying the little guys."
The Monteiro judge and jury were exposed to this mentality. $5 million damages, including $3.5 million penal.
“Reprehensible.” Notice of appeal filed.
As far as moving goes, Friends of the White Geese have proposed moving and part of the vileness of Patrick's people is the fact that they have not been moved during what is supposed to be temporary work.
The Charles River White Geese should be allowed to return to their home of most of the last 30 years, Magazine Beach.
The outrageous starvation wall should be chopped down. The poisons being dumped on the fields at Magazine Beach by people, state and city, with contempt for the environment should be ended. The expensive poison drainage systems should be filled in since there should be no need for them. The Charles River White Geese should be allowed to return to their nesting area when the Charles River White Geese deem it necessary. The bizarre staging destruction should be removed and returned to nature. The staging should be under Memorial Drive. Plans to use Obama money to destroy hundreds of trees to the east and create another starvation initiative should destroyed. When the project has been completed with minimal environmental harm nature should be reinstated at the nesting area was in September 1999.
This would restore the status quo before the heartless animal abuse and bizarre environmental destruction started.
